To be or to pretend to be – A qualitative
systematic literature review of Shakespeare
and management
Master Thesis
Student: Laura Enriquez Ibarra - S3655687
MSc BA track: MSc Organizational and Management Control (O&MC)
Supervisor: Dr. C.P.A Heijes
Date: June 24th, 2019
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword 3 Abstract 4 Introduction 5 Research Goals 10 Methods 11 Search 11 Eligibility criteria 12 Information Sources 14 Research Findings 14 Discussion 19Limitations and Further Research 26
References 27
3
Foreword
I would like to express my deep gratitude to both the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) and to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mexico (Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores) for granting me the opportunity of pursuing the Master in Business Administration, track Organizational and Management Control, at the University of Groningen.
Laura Enriquez Ibarra Groningen, June 24th, 2019
4
Abstract
5
Introduction
Managing is one of the oldest and most important activities for humanity. It began when people created groups to coordinate individual efforts to achieve common goals. In this regard, management can be defined as “the process of designing and maintaining an environment in which individuals, working together in groups, efficiently accomplish selected aims.” (Weihrich & Koontz, 1993, p.4).
The most generally accepted approach toward management is the classical management movement, which was developed between 1885 and 1940 and includes the scientific management and the administrative management theory (Pindur, Rogers & Suk Kim, 1995). In that context, Taylor (1947) established the principles of the scientific management. He highlighted the need of improving productivity and that the maximum prosperity of both the employer and the employee is the leading purpose of management. Under Taylor’s supervision, the level of productivity in an organization increased by almost 400%. He applied different techniques, one of the main technique was that the workers had to follow exactly his instructions (Robbins & Coulter, 2014). Therefore, he limited the room for employee’s creativity and required everything to be done by the book.
His contemporary, Henri Fayol, the father of the classical management movement (Parker & Ritson, 2005b), identified the basic managerial activities: planning, organizing, command, coordination, and control; together are considered to be the management process (Wren & Bedeian, 1994). However, scholars and practitioners have claimed that limiting management to only such managerial activities ignores other aspects of the field at the expense of its technical definition; therefore, new approaches to the analysis of management have risen (Blumberg, 1980), which, among others, include empirical or case approach, group behavior approach, and systems approach (Weihrich & Koontz, 1993).
6
trace a proof of basic management techniques back to year 3000 BC, or to Socrates, who came up with his own definition around the year 400 BC (Pindur et al., 1995).
The multidisciplinary approach can also be seen in the classrooms, where management educators are integrating humanities in their teaching methods, such as in philosophy (Small, 2006), poetry (Grisham, 2006; Grisoni & Kirk, 2006) and literature (Michaelson, 2014). There are several reasons behind this, humanities offer the possibility for students to explore playfully the ethical and social aspects of business by enhancing their imagination and creativity. Through art, they can also express and reflect on their own values (Statler & Monthoux, 2015) and to foster more critical thinking (Statler & Monthoux, 2015; Short & Ketchen, 2005). In addition, humanities seem to provide an opportunity to create awareness and insights that are useful for the management practitioners. These skills become important when coming up with a vision and direction of an organization (Grisoni & Kirk, 2006). At the same time, humanities can facilitate the teaching of interpersonal soft skill qualities, such as leadership and communication (Robles, 2012). These ‘soft skills’ have been claimed to be more challenging to teach than theory and analytical thinking (Muff, 2012). However, management educators have discovered that they can encourage a higher students engagement by using humanities which at the end will contribute to better learning outcomes (Taylor & Statler, 2014).
Some argue that fiction in the literature field is not aimed to provide universal answers but that its use will help to facilitate the learning of business ethics and thus, consolidate moral reasoning (McAdams & Koppensteiner, 1992). Additionally, literature can offer lessons about strategy, leadership, performance and organization, which is important for students since they usually lack professional experience (Short & Ketchen, 2005). Therefore, they can use these lessons as an accessible and valuable guide for their professional development. Furthermore, literature can be used as a learning resource since fiction can provide illustrations of leadership and management in action (Mockler, 2002) and literary pieces can help students to be more aware of their morality and foster the skills of decision making for addressing ethical issues (McAdams & Koppensteiner, 1992).
7
Regarding the use of fiction in the classroom, Shakespeare seems to be trendy among renowned universities: the Boston College has been using Shakespeare’s plays for its leadership course (Stevenson, 1996). Likewise, the Warwick Business School, at least since 2012, is using Shakespeare’s plays as part of its syllabus in its Master in Business Administration (“Shakespeare inspiring”, 2012). In addition, the MIT Sloan School of Business offers a course called “EnActing leadership: Shakespeare and performance” where the students are invited to perform some plays of Shakespeare (Leadership Curriculum, 2019). Hence, we can see that the link of Shakespeare and management is already being emphasized in the academic world. For instance, besides the teaching of Shakespeare’s plays in business schools, there are also academic papers stating that Shakespeare can be useful to learn how to manage people (Egan, 2000) or that he provides illustration of effective and ineffective strategic management (Mockler, 2002).
However, as Statler and Monthoux (2015) pointed out, it is important to be critical. Without taking into consideration all the complexities of humanities offer, one risk of utilizing them only “as a kind of cheap and vulgar instrumentalization” (p.6).
Scholars defend the use of Shakespeare at school since his plays are timeless and provide an example of different leadership styles (Etzold, 2012; Stevenson, 1996) as well as examples of abuse of power and accountability of a given behavior (Harris and Brown, 1989). They further argue that some of his plays (e.g. Hamlet) will help students focus on the problems of their actions in an imperfect world (Shaw & Locke, 1993).
The link of Shakespeare – commonly referred to as the Bard (Hume, 1997) – to the management concept has also a practical connotation; there are published books written by practitioners on this topic. They claim that there is a strong relationship and parallels between Shakespeare’s plays and contemporary management, mainly because management includes leadership and Shakespeare has lessons to teach us in this subject (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Corrigan, 1999; Shafritz, 1992, Talbott, 1994, Whitney & Packer, 2002).
8
investment and even manager (“Shakespeare: We Speak”, 2005). Moreover, it has been argued that there are lessons that can be drawn from his plays, such as King Lear, Henry V, Julius Caesar, Othello, Macbeth and Hamlet to address management issues such as leadership, motivation and management per se (Bharadwaj, 2014).
Every year, there are around 5,000 titles published on how to manage organizations and most of them include fashionable concepts such as culture, excellence, total quality management, empowerment, business process re-engineering, downsizing, knowledge work and globalization (Collins, 2013). In this regard, as the publications on Shakespeare and management keeps growing, it is important to analyze and elucidate whether this phenomenon is offering a new and insightful approach toward management or if it is only another fashionable concept. In this regard, it is important to note that management discipline is prone to fads (Parker & Ritson, 2005), which can be understood as “a managerial intervention, aimed at improving organizational performance, which appears innovative, rational and functional” (Philips Carson, Lanier, Carson & Birkenmeier, 1999, p.321).
According to Weihrich and Koontz (1993), fads come and go and despite their temporary nature some can survive. Some fads might enhance the functioning of an organization but the debate comes when they are only temporary solutions to a given problem, then, it is important to question their value, and their contribution. They might even harm organizations since they can spread technologies that are not useful for any organization or by stating that they provide innovativeness that does not reflect economic performance for the company (Abrahamson, 1991). Consequently, the term fad usually has a pejorative connotation (Collins, 2013).
Moreover, we need to be aware of the fact that management fashion elicits doubts regarding the value of academic knowledge. There is a danger that ideas spread by management consultants and gurus become more accepted and acknowledged than the ones disseminated by scholars working within business schools (Clark, 2004). A characteristic of these management ideas is their “malleability and plasticity” (Clark, 2004, p.302), they tend to be very wide principles that lack accuracy. Therefore, they remain “ambiguous and vague” (Clark, 2004, p.302)
9
p.301). This implies that numerous gurus are writers who are publishing for the first time without previous experience. Therefore, they rely on the guidance provided by the editor and often they do not write the books in their entirety –they get the assistance of a “creative collaborator during the writing process” (Clark, 2004, p.302).
From this perspective one may wonder whether the connection of the concept of management with Shakespeare, that is quite catchy, could indeed provide an insightful innovative approach toward management. Therefore, the aim of this research is to answer the following research question:
How does the link of the concept of management and Shakespeare offer an innovative and useful approach toward management?
In a broad sense, management innovation can be defined as “a difference in the form, quality, or state over time of the management activities in an organization, where the change is a novel or unprecedented departure from the past.” (Birkinshaw, Hamel & Mol, 2008, p.826). Birkinshaw et al. (2008) stated that some researchers have defined an innovation “as ‘new to the state of the art,’ which essentially means without known precedent. But many other researchers implicitly see innovation as ‘new to the organization’” (pp. 828-829) or, as Robins and Coulter (2014) said, innovation is “doing things differently” and “exploring new territory” (p. 42). However, it is important to be mindful of the proinnovation biases, which refer to the “presumptions that innovations will benefit organizations” (Abrahamson, 1991, p.589). Therefore, special attention will be needed when identifying the innovative approaches, if any, to clarify whether they are indeed useful.
10
for busy practitioners” (p.189) especially in this so-called big data era (McAfee & Brynjolfsson, 2012).
Research Goals
To this end, this review attempts to provide tools to existing and aspiring managers, as well as to management scholars, that allow the analysis of the potential benefits and/or pitfalls of this burgeoning approach of linking Shakespeare to management.
This paper attempts to provide practical relevance by identifying the way that knowledge about management could be presented to gain the attention of management practitioners, lecturers and management students. This become even more relevant since, according to Seal (2010), business schools, top management, business consultants and management gurus add to the elaboration of managerial discourse. In this regard, Abrahamson (1996) explained that in order to intervene in “the management-fashion-setting process” (p. 279) there shall be a better formation of the consumers of management rhetoric. Therefore, since business schools are using Shakespeare’s plays in their programs and there seems to be a rise in the business consultants writing about Shakespeare and management, it is important to determine the amount of existing publications on this topic. This will allow us to analyze its contribution to the management concept and elucidate its innovativeness and usefulness.
In addition, some scholars have stated that there are few attempts on research that provides useful suggestions for improving the business practice and understand the business conduct (Michaelson, 2005). Thus, this review aims to diminish this gap by clarifying the contribution that humanities – illustrated by Shakespeare’s plays – add to the field of management.
11
Methods
A qualitative systematic review was conducted since it follows a replicable process (Tranfield,
et al., 2003) and “an explicit, rigorous, and transparent methodology” (Greenhalgh, Robert,
Macfarlane, Bate & Kyriakidou, 2004, p.582) for reviewing the existing publications with the goal of minimizing the bias of the researcher due to the exhaustive searches of publications and by keeping track of the decisions that the researcher made along the process (Tranfield et al., 2003).
The proposed review will be based on the guidelines by Tranfield et al. (2003) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) four-phase flow diagram shown in Figure A1 (Appendix A), which displays the number of identified records, excluded papers, and included articles and/or books (Liberati, Altman, Tetzlaff, Mulrow, Gøtzsche, Ioannidis & Moher, 2009).
The referred PRISMA flow diagram was used for the review process to identify the relevant publications and material that contained the elements that allow to answer the following research question: How does the link of the concept of management and Shakespeare offer
an innovative and useful approach toward management?
In this context, the papers were analyzed using the following criteria.
Search
The search terms that were used to search for publications are presented in Table B1 (Appendix B). The strategy consisted of creating search to form keywords. These keywords were searched as subject terms in the search engine. Searches included: “Shakespeare and management”, “Shakespeare and business”, and “Shakespeare and leadership”. The concept of leadership was included since leading is considered to be within the management functions and, from a managerial perspective, leaders have managerial authority (Robbins & Coulter, 2014).
12 Eligibility criteria
The articles that qualified to be eligible were those published in academic journals. During the search, it was noted that some of the articles that included the concept of management or leadership and Shakespeare, and were under the publication type “news” or “periodical” referred to book reviews. Therefore, a specific search was conducted to find the title of these books. The results are shown in Table C2 (Appendix C). It is important to mention that the books were not available in the databases used. Therefore, they were accessed via either their physical edition or their Kindle version (e-book).
Academic articles and books were included in this review since it was expected that they were written by academics and practitioners, respectively. By including both in the scope of this research, the trends on the topics and the multiplicity of approaches toward management and Shakespeare can be unfolded. It is important to mention that eligible papers were subject to the availability of the articles in its entirety, the publications being written in English and published from 1980 onwards. For instance, business books started showing up in the US best-sellers list in 1983 (Collins, 2013).
In order to identify the text as relevant, the first step was to read the abstract and see if there was an explicit link or mention of management, leadership and Shakespeare or any of his plays. The following step included reading of the text in its entirety and elucidating whether there was an attempt to analyze the concept of management, or any of its elements, into Shakespeare’s plays. In that case, the publications were further analyzed using the following criteria.
a. Authorship, according to Clark (2004), the long list of authors, along with additional contributors, is an element that might indicate the possibility of facing a guru. This could indicate the support received by a third party, that is, by a ‘creative collaborator’. Moreover, the background of the authors of books was taken into account to illustrate the similarities and differences of their approaches with those of the academics (authors of articles). Therefore, this criterion helps us to elaborate on the innovativeness of the existing publications.
b. Reason to use Shakespeare, the justification provided by the author(s) to use Shakespeare was under scrutiny since it can be considered as a guideline toward the innovativeness element.
13
provided a specific reason for their initial idea of linking Shakespeare to management which is different to what they found in his plays. This criterion also helps to elucidate on the innovativeness nature of the publications as well as on the usefulness aspect. d. Prescriptiveness, it was considered whether the texts implied a prescriptive nature. For
instance, by providing rules or specific guidelines in their usage. By observing this, it can be further analyzed both the innovativeness and usefulness aspects. In this regard, the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines prescriptive as “acquired by, founded on, or determined by prescription or by long-standing custom” (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prescriptive). Therefore, this is contrary to innovation since it refers to long-standing custom and innovation is intended to be used as ‘unexplored territory’. At the same time, another way of being prescriptive is by telling someone what to do (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/prescription), and this could suggest usefulness.
e. Parallels, at a first glance, it was noted that some texts drew parallels to real life stories, such as successful business stories, corporate scandals, and personal experiences of the writers. Therefore, it was decided to include it as an additional criterion to analyze the texts since this might indicate the similarities on the approach that the authors are offering. Therefore, both the innovativeness and usefulness aspects can be traced. If the parallels fit Shakespeare’s plays, then we can see the utility of them.
f. Use of quotes and excerpts providing context, since most of the publications included excerpts or quotes from Shakespeare’s plays, it was decided to include it as a criterion to be further explored. This will illustrate the commonalities and differences on the approaches that the authors took into account when linking Shakespeare to the management concept. In addition, in the case that the writers inserted quotes without any explanation might indicate a deliberate change of context of Shakespeare’s words and a possible shoehorning of them into forced rules toward management. Moreover, it provides an indication of the kind of analysis that is being offered by the authors. If several authors provide similar excerpts this could indicate a lack of innovativeness in their approach. If the quotes are taken out of their context it could be an indication of the lack of usefulness of the texts.
14
one. For doing this, it was observed if the use of excerpts and quotes was provided along with some context or synopsis; this could be an indication of utilizing Shakespeare’s words for a specific goal. Moreover, it will be examined if it seems to be a close reading of the plays or if it seems like a superficial one. This can be noted by the characters that were analyzed and the topics they elaborate on. A superficial analysis shall be an indication of lack of usefulness of the text. In addition, a similarity of approaches might indicate a lack of innovativeness.
The aforementioned criteria were selected since they provide elements that can be taken into account in order to answer the research question of this paper.
Furthermore, duplicated records were excluded. The total number of identified publications along with the number of those included and excluded is shown in Figure A1 (Appendix A).
Information Sources
EBSCOhost, which is an intuitive online research platform, was used for searching the desired concepts. The databases selected for this platform were Academic Search Premier, Business Source Premier, eBook Academic Collection, eBook Collection, E-Journals, ERIC.
In case that an article was not available in EBSCOhost, then it was accessed either via Google Scholar or SmartCat. The information sources were selected based on their accessibility and they were accessed via the proxy of the University of Groningen.
Research Findings
In this section the findings of the systematic literature review are presented. The summary of the books and articles analyzed are shown in Table D1 and Table D2, respectively, both enclosed in Appendix D.
15
of parallels whereas the sixth column indicates if the author(s) provided some context when a quote or excerpt was inserted. Finally, the seventh column shows the type of analysis offered by the author (s), and it indicates if the analysis was considered to be superficial or deep. In order to suggest whether the existing publications linking Shakespeare and the concept of management provide an innovative and useful approach or not, this chapter is divided in the elements that contribute to that aim. That is, the results are shown based on the authorship of the papers, their reasons to use Shakespeare, argued contribution, prescriptiveness, their use of parallels, quotes and excerpts. And, lastly, on the type of analysis offered by the author(s).
a. Authorship
Almost half of the writers of the books recognize that they were supported by additional researcher(s) or reviser(s) during the writing process (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Davies et
al., 2007; Talbott, 1994) while only one article has joint authorship (Duska & Ragatz, 2008).
Talbott (1994), who only provides quotes accompanied by a commentary, acknowledges the contribution of his research team comprised by three other people. Davies et al. (2007) stated that they wanted to create something new and to this extent, they gathered twenty-six writers who were asked to “research, …study and write… and to explore Shakespeare’s relevance to modern business, with a particular focus on his language” (p.2).
In addition, the fact that all the articles were published from 2003 onwards, unlike the books, where more than half were published before 2000 (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Corrigan, 1999; Shafritz, 1992; Talbott, 1994) stands out.
b. Reason to use Shakespeare
16
management gurus while Davies et al. (2007) parallels him with a cartoonist arguing that both look into the human nature and exploit it for the sake of entertainment.
c. Argued contribution
In addition to what is mentioned in Table D1 and Table D2 (Appendix D), some authors agree that experience is an important lesson that we can draw from Shakespeare’s plays (Charlesworth, 2004; Talbott, 1994; Shafritz, 1992). In this regard, Charlesworth (2004) suggests that an organization shall have a balance between youth and experience since both contribute to ‘something’.
Additionally, it is interesting to note that Talbott (1994), who claims to apply his leadership commentaries on his book, only includes one excerpt from Henry V – out of the one hundred fifty he offers – to suggest that the lesson is “go in goodness, and let goodness be your cause” (last paragraph) while other authors explore the importance of Henry V regarding leadership (Bezio, 2013; Charlesworth, 2004; Corrigan, 1999; Discorfano, 2003; Herbel, 2015; Shafritz, 1992; Whitney and Packer, 2002) through different lenses. For instance, Discorfano (2003) and Herbel (2015) explore the construction of Henry V’s leadership while emphasizing his ‘goodness’. However, some other authors insist on looking into Henry V’s characteristics in order to look into the complexities that leadership offers (Bezio, 2013; Corrigan, 1999; Stein, 2005). In this regard, Abbott also elaborates on the character of a leader as a social construction but through analyzing Richard II rather than Henry V. Roberts (2017) suggests that Coriolanus encourages the recognition of the relationship between leader and community as a crucial element toward effective leadership.
In addition, by analyzing the plays, some authors (Corrigan, 1999; Stein, 2005) recognize the importance of emotions as a manager and as a leader, and self-awareness (Herbel, 2015).
d. Prescriptiveness
17
specific situations, such as in how to dress and how to behave during a business dinner. Talbott (1994) provides advice that goes beyond the business sphere, for example, when he suggests to “find an share the joy in each day” (p.61), or to “Share your joy of life” (p.128). Whitney and Packer (2002) state that they can provide a framework of “enduring principles-rules to live by” (p.3760). Davies et al. (2007) state “I want you to ditch the PowerPoint and seduce them by the ears.” (p.25).
e. Parallels
Talbott (1994) is the only author of books that does not provide parallels or analogies to real life situations. Whitney and Packer (2002) and Charlesworth (2004) focus more on their personal experiences when drawing parallels than the rest of the writers, they provide too much detail regarding their working/coach experience. In addition, Davies et al. (2007) equal Othello’s characters with business writers arguing that Othello would be “damn good at his job. But a loner” (p.138) and Iago would “probably have his own blog, but under a pseudonym.” (p.138). Stein (2005) also utilize Othello to draw an analogy with the corporate case concerning the Gucci family. Abbott (2010) provides the analogy of Richard II, depicted as a ‘bad’ leader, with president Richard Nixon. He also draws the parallel with a corporate case concerning an investment analyst. Similarly, Roberts (2017) depicts an analogy between South Africa’s political situation and Coriolanus.
In this regard, the parallels that Shafritz (1992) offers can be very general. For instance, he draws parallels with Hamlet and Henry V suggesting that executives want to obtain upper-level positions despite the fact that once they get it, they will be complaining about the demands of such advancement. Some of the parallels offered by Augustine and Adelman (1999) are not linked to the play they are discussing but, overall, they provide corporate analogies.
f. Use of quotes and excerpts providing context
18
g. Type of analysis
First, in order to illustrate the different types of analysis performed by the authors, examples of some of their conclusions are presented in Table D3 (Annex D). It is important to point out that Abbott (2010) and Discorfano (2003) were excluded since they do not insert any excerpt of Shakespeare’s plays.
Second, while all of the books included more than four of Shakespeare’s plays, the articles mostly focus on one of Shakespeare’s plays. Only Glimp (2018) included more than one play in his paper in order to elaborate on Shakespeare’s standpoint on fiscal policy.
Third, there is a variety of approaches toward the plays. For instance, a superficial approach is deemed in the case where there is lack of context before the quote. Talbott (1994), who exclusively inserts excerpts to which he applies his so-called leadership commentary, suggests an attempt to ‘translating’ Shakespeare’s words rather than offering something closer to an analysis. In the same vein, Davies et al. (2007) offer a reductionist approach toward the quotes which can be seen in Table D3 (Appendix D). In addition, the validity of the parallels is also considered in this review to distinguish a superficial approach in the analysis. That is, if the parallels seem forced (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Charlesworth, 2004; Shafritz, 1992; Whitney & Packer, 2002) or reductionist (Davies et al., 2007).
19
Discussion
Based on the findings, similarities and differences among the texts will be addressed in terms of authorship, prescriptiveness, the parallels and analogies utilized, the way that the excerpts were inserted throughout the documents, and the type of analysis offered by the authors. In other words, the elements found in the eligible publications that help us to answer the research question of this research will be further explored.
a. Authorship
As previously mentioned, an indicator of the possibility of facing a management guru and therefore, a fad, is to look at the number of authors along with additional contributors of the texts (Clark, 2004). So special attention is needed when looking at some books (Talbott, 1994). Even if some of the publications were written by a single author, some of the authors suggest the appropriation of Shakespeare (Charlesworth, 2004; Shafritz, 1992). In this regard, Fazel and Geddes (2017) defined appropriation as “the simultaneous practice of consumption and production” (p.6). It seems like the aim of these authors was to create a product rather than to explore Shakespeare’s plays for the sake of contributing to the existing managerial discourse. In addition, it can be seen that the academic articles have been on a rise from 2003 onwards whereas the validity of the books could be contested since they might be considered outdated, especially those published before year 2000. Thus, it might be implied that articles provide new trends and, therefore, suggest more innovation.
Moreover, in Table C2 (Appendix C) it is shown that the book “Shakespeare and Management” could not be found neither in its physical edition nor in its electronic version. After looking it on internet via Google, it can be seen that it is from 1989. This might imply that it has not been reprinted since it did not have the expected impact in the market, thus, its usefulness could be contested. Due to the aforementioned elements, the innovativeness on the publications reviewed is debatable (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Charlesworth, 2004; Corrigan, 1999; Davies et. Al, 2007; Shafritz, 1992; Talbott, 1994).
b. Reason to use Shakespeare
20
previously mentioned, is considered to be an element of management for the purposes of this review. This contests the innovativeness on such publications. That is, if the topic of leadership has been further explored through different perspectives, then, it might have been exhausted. Also, it is important to emphasize that Shafritz (1992) claims that part of the importance of his book lies in the fact that the quotes inserted can be replicated in corporate documents. As Burt (2016) suggests “The new axiom becomes that the citation of the classics confers classic status on the citer.” (p.45).
Moreover, the justification that some authors provide to use Shakespeare (Charlesworth, 2004; Shafritz, 1992) and the way they refer to him (Davies et al., 2007; Shafritz 1992) suggests appropriation. Therefore because there are several authors writing on Shakespeare and management, it can be suggested the lack of innovativeness on this topic. The authors are not looking to do things differently, they are just following a fashion and thus, they are no longer being innovative.
c. Argued contribution
Some of the argued contributions seem reductionist, they can be very specific but at the same time their usability or usefulness can be questioned due to its limited scope (Charlesworth, 2004; Talbott, 1994; Shafritz, 1992).
21
d. Prescriptiveness
As it was stated previously, prescriptiveness is contrary to innovation since it refers to long-standing custom while innovation suggests discovering something that has not known precedent.
In some of the texts we can notice their degree of prescriptiveness based on the vocabulary they use. For instance, and as previously mentioned, Corrigan (1999) suggests that Shakespeare’s plays illustrate what leaders should and should not do, which is a characteristic of prescriptive. In addition, it is important to elucidate the reasons of the readers to read a prescriptive publication. Some of the authors suggest that their publications are a ‘shortcut’ to Shakespeare’s wisdom since they extract his lessons on management and leadership (Charlesworth, 2004; Corrigan, 1999; Shafritz, 1992; Talbott, 1994; Whitney & Packer, 2002). However, if the audience is reading this publications, one might wonder whether it would not be better to go to academic literature instead. In this regard, it is interesting to reflect on the findings of the study performed by Tucker and Lowe (2014). They found out that there seems to be a lack of interest of the practitioners toward the academic business research mainly due to the following reasons: 1) Research findings appear to be difficult to apply to the problems that practitioners are facing. In other words, it could be a “problem of translation” (p.415) since practitioners and academics seem to be speaking a different language. This problematic could be diminished by experienced people, such as Talbott (1994), who is a motivational speaker.
2) Research findings are having trouble to disseminate correctly among practitioners. Most of the research is being published in academic journals, which usually the practitioners are not familiar with. Managers are more prone to use books, seminars, journals and websites (van Helden and Northcott, 2010).
Consequently, it is important to spread out the academic research among practitioners and aspiring managers. Business schools could be helpful with the latter. By doing this, there could be an increase on the audience reading more recent publications which might imply reading more innovative texts.
22
Discorfano, 2003; Herbel, 2015; Roberts. 2017; Stein, 2005) and, thus, they could be deemed as innovative since they are not just following a procedure by the book. Therefore, it can be stated that an alternative for business cases is to use Shakespeare in the business world not because he offers solutions ‘to-go’ to the existing managerial problems, but because a close reading to his plays will highlight the dilemmas and conflicts that the characters encounter throughout the story. This could be helpful to stimulate the creativity of the reader. Life is a constant being, it is not only about facing a situation that once solved would never appear again. Therefore, by noticing the complexity that management involves, creativity would help us to make sense of the world we are living in. The creativity might highlight the fact that there are many paths to be taken and that we have a choice that will come with its consequences, expected or unwanted.
e. Parallels
In some publications it is found that Shakespeare’s quotes are assembled at the author’s whim. Numerous excerpts are taken out of their context to illustrate and draw parallels with corporate stories or personal experiences that seem to be shoehorned. Shakespeare’s words seem to appear as an excuse to talk about a particular topic (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Charlesworth, 2004; Davies et al., 2007; Talbott, 1994; Shafritz, 1992; Whitney and Packer, 2002), or as Burt (2016) suggested with certain irony, it is like certain play “is not directed at just anyone. It is aimed specifically at the leaders of today…” (pp.45-46) suggesting that the complexities that their characters offer are being overlooked. Even Shakespeare himself wrote1: “The devil can cite
Scripture for his purpose” (The Merchant of Venice, 1.3.93), which is what some authors seem to be doing (Charlesworth, 2004;Davies et al., 2007; Shafritz, 1992; Whitney & Packer, 2002). They offer excerpts to make a statement, even if there is no relationship between the quote and the management topic.
The parallels offered by Davies et al. (2007) suggest reductionism in their approach toward both Shakespeare and management. Moreover, all the parallels of Shakespeare to real life situations seem to be directed to profit organization. This might trigger the question of whether non-profit organizations could benefit from the approach to Shakespeare and management. In this regard, Herbel (2015) does mention the public sector (non-profit) when he highlights the
23
importance to have an ethical approach toward leadership in the public sector. This approach suggests the inclusion of both usefulness and innovativeness elements.
Lastly, on one hand, it appears that the authors, specifically of the books, insert idle or non-related excerpts of many different plays to prove that Shakespeare has multiple lessons to offer to management. They seem to equate more quotes to more lessons. In doing that, rather than offering a multiplicity of approaches toward the insights that Shakespeare could potentially offer to management, they represent the saying of “Jack of all trades, master of none”. That is, they provide a very superficial analysis that allow the reader to question the added value of Shakespeare on management. Therefore, it is difficult to elucidate on the real usefulness and contributions of such texts (Charlesworth, 2004; Davies et al., 2007; Shafritz, 1992; Talbott, 1994; Whitney & Packer, 2002). Even in their innovative approach, since most of them discuss the same plays and even analyze the same excerpts (Augustine & Adelman, 1999; Bezio, 2013; Charlesworth, 2004; Herbel, 2015; Whitney & Packer, 2002), their innovativeness can be questioned.
On the other hand, not all of the articles offer parallels or analogies and yet, this does not diminish the quality of their analysis (Bezio, 2013; Discorfano, 2003; Glimp, 2018; Herbel, 2015).
f. Use of quotes and excerpts providing context
It was noted that Talbott (1994) inserts excerpts without further context or explanation. He only applies to them his so-called leadership commentary afterwards. This omission of context might indicate a forced fit between Shakespeare and management and, therefore, its usefulness is contested. The rest of the publications provide a context in a larger or minor extent which might indicate the type of analysis they offer in their writings. Sometimes, the relationship between the inserted excerpts and the parallel drawn is not clear. Some excerpts seem to be an excuse to develop an idea. This forced fit challenges the validity of the chosen excerpts and, therefore, their usefulness.
g. Type of analysis
24
pointed out “We are not academics, and this is not intended to be an objective critical assessment of Shakespeare.” (p.xvii). In this regard, and despite the fact that this systematic literature review is not intended to perform literary criticism, it is important to be mindful of some of the elements that need to be analyzed in order to perform it, such as the plot, character, narrative, theme, tone, and even exclamation marks (Eagleton, 2013) since these elements could help us to get a close reading of Shakespeare’s plays. Therefore, although the aforementioned authors are not offering us a literary analysis, they could disclose the way they are approaching either Shakespeare’s words or the management or leadership theory that they are analyzing. Some of the authors of the books imply that they would like to provide a shortcut to Shakespeare’s wisdom and, therefore, it appears like the promise of a magic formula to address the practitioners’ concerns. At a first glance, this seems smoother than the idea of analyzing Shakespeare’s plays on first hand, since time is crucial to practitioners and, as it was previously pointed out, he is often deemed as ‘difficult’ to read. Thus, it can be said that among other actions we need to tackle “the myth that analysis is the enemy of enjoyment” (Eagleton, 2013, p.40).
25
Shakespeare and management in order to develop a close reading and, therefore, to have insightful approach on the management field.
In this regard, it is important to mention that Corrigan is the only author of the books that attempts to take one step further in his analysis. In contrast, the articles seem to imply that the further you move from a superficial approach the more insights you can obtain (Abbott, 2010; Bezio, 2013; Discorfano, 2003; Glimp, 2018; Herbel, 2015; Roberts, 2017; Stein, 2005). For instance, it can be said that elaborating on emotions is an added value of Shakespeare toward management. As emotions are embedded in real life they could be useful in business cases. Emotions also emphasize the importance of being mindful of the human approach in business. Sometimes the theory is too rigid and it considers managers to be objects rather than human beings with all the complexities that this involves.
In another order of ideas, it is important to mention that Drucker (1974), “The Father of Modern Management” (Cohen, 2009), already wrote about the importance of management in providing direction to organizations, communications within the company, making decisions under uncertain scenarios and strategic planning. Therefore, the lessons drawn from most of the writers reviewed in this research (Augustine and Adelman, 1999; Charlesworth, 2004; Corrigan, 1999, Davies et al., 2007; Shafritz, 1992; Talbot, 1994; Whitney and Packer, 2002) have been already explored in the theory of management. Therefore, it would be inconceivable to consider them as innovative.
In this regard, it is important to be mindful of what Calvino stated (1986), “A classic does not necessarily teach us anything we did not know before. In a classic we sometimes discover something we have always known (or thought we knew), but without knowing that this author said it first, or at least is associated with it in a special way.” (p.1379).
26
a fashionable concept that is neither innovative nor useful. By doing this, it might be implied that they do not contribute to the management literature. We might need to remind to this kind of authors Calvino’s words “we do not read the classics out of duty or respect, only out of love” (p. 1385).
Limitations and Further Research
The search of this systematic literature review was carried out in English where the majority of the authors have English as a first language. This might have an impact on cross-cultural aspects since non English publications were not taken into account. This is the first limitation of this research. In addition, this review only analyzed articles derived from management studies published in academic journals subject to the databases mentioned in the methods section; this is a second limitation of this review. Therefore, a suggested venue for future research is to widen the scope by carrying out the search in specialized journals of Shakespeare which could result on new approaches toward the management concept.
Similarly to the second limitation, a third one is that the books considered were subject to book reviews listed on the search engine. In this regard, for future research it is suggested to direct the search to the books and exhaust the methods in order to guarantee the inclusion of all of the books that involve Shakespeare and management. In this sense, further research is suggested to expand on the findings of this review by broadening the scope to include additional search terms and further search engines and databases.
Moreover, and as mentioned in the discussion, although the topics extracted from the practitioners and academics might be similar, the perspectives that they offer are different and could be complementary. Thus, another suggested venue for future research is to combine the knowledge of both and come up with a joint contribution that deepens the analysis of Shakespeare’s plays toward the concept of management. A more multidisciplinary approach is needed to go beyond what is already written in the management theory.
27
References
Abbott, P. (2010). What can we learn from Shakespeare about “bad” leaders?. Journal of
Leadership Studies, 3(4), 102-107.
Abrahamson, E. (1991). Managerial fads and fashions: The diffusion and rejection of innovations. Academy of management review, 16(3), 586-612.
Abrahamson, E. (1996). Management fashion. Academy of management review, 21(1), 254-285.
Augustine, N. R., & Adelman, K. L. (1999). Shakespeare in charge: The bard's guide to leading
and succeeding on the business stage (Vol. 11). Hyperion-Talk-Miramax.
Bezio, K. M. (2013). Personating leadership: Shakespeare's Henry V and performative negotiation. Leadership and the Humanities, 1(1), 43-58.
Bharadwaj, A. (2014). Shakespeare on Leadership, Communication and Management - Implications for Cross-cultural Business Contexts. Journal of Creative Communications 9(2) 161–184
Birkinshaw, J., Hamel, G., & Mol, M. J. (2008). Management innovation. Academy of
management Review, 33(4), 825-845.
Blumberg, S. K. (1980). Notes on the Art of Administration. Midwest Review of Public
Administration, 14(3), 191-199.
Burt, R. (2016). Shakespeare after mass media. Springer.
Calvino, I. (1986). The uses of literature. [E-reader version]. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Chalmers, I., & Altman, D. G. (Eds.). (1995). Systematic reviews. London: BMJ Publishing. Charlesworth, R. (2004). Shakespeare, the coach. Pan.
Clark, T. (2004). The fashion of management fashion: a surge too far?. Organization, 11(2), 297-306.
Cohen, W. A. (2009). Drucker on leadership: New lessons from the father of modern
management. John Wiley & Sons.
Collins, D. (2013). Management fads and buzzwords: Critical-practical perspectives. Routledge.
Corrigan, P. (1999). Shakespeare on management: leadership lessons for today's managers. Kogan Page Publishers.
Davies, J., Simmons, J., & Williams, R. (Eds.). (2007). The Bard and Co: Shakespeare's Role
28
Discorfano, S. (2003). The creation of a leader in Shakespeare's “Henry V”. Leadership in
Action: A Publication of the Center for Creative Leadership and Jossey‐Bass, 23(4), 11-11.
Dong, J. Q., & Yang, C. H. (2018). Business value of big data analytics: A systems-theoretic approach and empirical test. Information & Management.
Drucker, P. F. (1974). Management: Tasks, responsibilities, practices. New York: Harper & Row.
Duska, R. F., & Ragatz, J. A. (2008). Ethics and Regulation Shakespeare's King Lear: Looking for an Estate Planner. JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL SERVICE PROFESSIONALS, 62(3), 21. Eagleton, T. (2013). How to read literature. [E-reader version]. Yale University Press.
Egan, M. (2000). Managers as kings: Shakespeare on modern leadership. Management
Decision, 38(5), 315-327.
Etzold, V. (2012). Power plays: What Shakespeare can teach on leadership. Business Strategy
Series, 13(2), 63-69.
Fazel, V. M., & Geddes, L. (Eds.). (2017). The Shakespeare User: Critical and Creative
Appropriations in a Networked Culture. [E-reader version]. Springer.
Glimp, D. (2018). Sovereignty after Taxes in Shakespeare's History Plays. SEL Studies in
English Literature 1500-1900, 58(1), 23-50.
Greenhalgh, T., Robert, G., Macfarlane, F., Bate, P., & Kyriakidou, O. (2004). Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. The Milbank
Quarterly, 82(4), 581-629.
Grisham, T. (2006). Metaphor, poetry, storytelling and cross-cultural leadership. Management
Decision, 44(4), 486-503.
Grisoni, L., & Kirk, P. (2006). Verse, voice and va va voom!: illuminating management processes through poetry. Management Decision, 44(4), 512-525.
Harris, C., & Brown, W. (1989). Teaching business ethics using fiction: A case that failed.
Organizational Behavior Teaching Review, 13(1), 38-47.
Herbel Jr, J. E. (2015). Shakespeare’s Machiavellian Moment: Discovering Ethics and Forming a Leadership Narrative in Henry V. Public Integrity, 17(3), 265-278.
Hume, R. D. (1997). Before the Bard:" Shakespeare" in Early Eighteenth-Century London.
ELH, 64(1), 41-75.
29
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., ... & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS medicine,
6(7), e1000100.
McAdams, T., & Koppensteiner, R. (1992). The manager seeking virtue: Lessons from literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(8), 627-634.
McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Davenport, T. H., Patil, D. J., & Barton, D. (2012). Big data: the management revolution. Harvard business review, 90(10), 60-68.
Michaelson, C. (2005). Dealing with swindlers and devils: Literature and business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(4), 359-373.
Michaelson, C. M. (2014). Literature and the canonical values of capitalism. In Aesthetics and
business ethics (pp. 37-50). Springer, Dordrecht.
Mockler, R. J. (2002). Using the arts to acquire and enhance management skills. Journal of
Management Education, 26(5), 574-585.
Muff, K. (2012). Are business schools doing their job?. Journal of Management Development,
31(7), 648-662.
Mol, M. J. (2018). Reflections on “the sources of management innovation” Mol & Birkinshaw, 2009. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 28(3), 278-281.
Parker, L. D., & Ritson, P. (2005). Fads, stereotypes and management gurus: Fayol and Follett today. Management Decision, 43(10), 1335-1357.
Parker, L. D., & Ritson, P. A. (2005b). Revisiting Fayol: anticipating contemporary management. British Journal of Management, 16(3), 175-194.
Phillips Carson, P., Lanier, P. A., Carson, K. D., & Birkenmeier, B. J. (1999). A historical perspective on fad adoption and abandonment. Journal of Management History, 5(6), 320-333. Pindur, W., Rogers, S. E., & Suk Kim, P. (1995). The history of management: a global perspective. Journal of management history, 1(1), 59-77.
Ridley, D. (2012). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students. Sage. Robbins, S. P., & Coulter, M. (2014). Management, Twelfth Global Edition.
Roberts, S. (2017). ‘Alone’,‘constant’and ‘(in) visible’: Staging leadership in Coriolanus.
Shakespeare in Southern Africa, 29(1), 27-49.
Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in today’s workplace. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 453-465.
30
Shafritz, J. M. (1992). Shakespeare on management: Wise business counsel from the bard. New York: HarperBusiness.
Shakespeare inspiring the next generation of business leaders. (2012, December 12). Retrieved from https://www.wbs.ac.uk/news/a-new-generation-of-business-leaders-using-shakespeare-to-learn/
Shakespeare: We Speak His Language. (2005, May). Literary Cavalcade, Vol. 57 Issue 8, 45. Shakespeare, W. (1623) Macbeth. Craig, W. J. (Ed.). The Complete Works of William
Shakespeare (The Oxford Shakespeare). Retrieved from
https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/shakespeare-macbeth--5
Shakespeare, W. (1890) The Winter’s Tale. Macmillan & Co. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.41878/page/n5
Shakespeare, W. (1916) Twelfth Night. Innes, A.D. (Ed.). The Arden Shakespeare. Retrieved from https://www.stmarys-ca.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/files/Twelfth_Night.pdf Shakespeare, W. (1917) King Lear. Smith, D.N. (Ed.). The Arden Shakespeare. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.213388/page/n1
Shakespeare, W. (1965) The Tragedy of Hamlet. Dowden, E. (Ed.). The Works of Shakespeare. Methuen. Retrieved from https://warburg.sas.ac.uk/pdf/emh81b2456902.pdf
Shakespeare, W. (1997). The Merchant of Venice. Brown, J. R. (Ed.). The Arden Edition of the
Works: Methuen. Retrieved from
https://archive.org/details/merchantofvenice00wil_h83/page/26
Shakespeare, W. (2001).Henry V. Gill, R. & Cantab., M.A. (Eds.). Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/henryv000shak
Shaw, G., & Locke, K. (1993). Using fiction to develop managerial judgment. Journal of
Management Education, 17(3), 349-359.
Short, J. C., & Ketchen Jr, D. J. (2005). Teaching timeless truths through classic literature: Aesop's Fables and strategic management. Journal of Management Education, 29(6), 816-832. Small, M. W. (2006). A case for including business ethics and the humanities in management programs. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(2), 195-211.
Statler, M., & Guillet de Monthoux, P. (2015). Humanities and arts in management education: The emerging Carnegie paradigm.
Stein, M. (2005). The Othello conundrum: The inner contagion of leadership. Organization
Studies, 26(9), 1405-1419.
Stevenson, W. B. (1996). A muse of fire or a winter of discontent? Teaching Shakespeare in the leadership course. Journal of Management Education, 20(1), 39-47.
31
Taylor, F. W. (1947). Taylor's Testimony Before the Special Hose Committee. Scientific
Management: Comprising Shop Management, The Principles of Scientific Management and Testimony Before the Special House Committee, 1-287.
Taylor, S. S., & Statler, M. (2014). Material matters: Increasing emotional engagement in learning. Journal of Management Education, 38(4), 586-607.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence‐informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British journal of
management, 14(3), 207-222.
Tucker, B. P., & Lowe, A. D. (2014). Practitioners are from Mars; academics are from Venus?: An investigation of the research-practice gap in management accounting. Accounting, Auditing
& Accountability Journal, 27(3), 394-425.
Van Helden, G. J., & Northcott, D. (2010). Examining the practical relevance of public sector management accounting research. Financial Accountability & Management, 26(2), 213-240. Weihrich, H., & Koontz, H. (1993). Management: A global perspective. McGraw-Hill.
Whitney, J. O., & Packer, T. (2002). Power plays: Shakespeare's lessons in leadership and
management. [E-reader version]. Simon and Schuster.
32
Appendices
Appendix A – PRISMA flow diagramFigure A1. PRISMA flow diagram
Flow of information through the different phases of the qualitative systematic literature review.
Id en tif ic at io
n Records identified through database
searching (n = 119) Screen in g Inc lu de d Elig ib ilit y
Additional records identified through other sources
(n = 7)
Records after duplicates removed (n = 115)
Records screened
(n = 115) Records excluded (n = 95)
Full-text articles assessed for eligibility
(n = 20)
Full-text articles excluded, with reasons
(n = 5)
Studies included in qualitative synthesis
33 Appendix B – Search Terms
Table B1. Summary of search terms
Name of search
engine Key word searches conducted Filters total resultsNumber of
Number of relevant articles found excluding duplicates Date of search EBSCOhost Subject Terms: "Shakespeare" and "management" 39 2 24-4-2019
34
Appendix C – Search Results Table C1. Search results (articles)
Authors Year Title Download from Exclude Reason
Rhine, Anthony S 2006 A Great Confusion in Theater Management. EBSCOhost X No Shakespeare Glimp, David. 2018 Sovereignty after Taxes in Shakespeare’s
History Plays.
Link to Smartcat
Dunne, Derek 2015 Decentring the law in Hamlet. X No access
Duska, Ronald F.;
Ragatz, Julie Anne 2008 Shakespeare's King Lear: Looking for an Estate Planner. EBSCOhost
Mitroff, Ian I 1996 Commentary on Kilduff and Berry. EBSCOhost X No Shakespeare
Michaelson,
Christopher 2005 Dealing with Swindlers and Devils: Literature and Business Ethics. EBSCOhost X No Shakespeare John Simmons 2007 The Bard and the boardroom: Shakespeare's continuing relevance for business. EBSCOhost X It is regarding Davies (2007)
book
Mitroff, Ian I. 1996 Commentary on Kilduff and Berry. X Duplicated
Discorfano, Sharon. 2003 The creation of a leader in Shakespeare's
“Henry V”. EBSCOhost
Stein, Mark. 2005 The Othello Conundrum: The Inner Contagion of Leadership. EBSCOhost Michaelson,
Christopher 2005 Dealing with Swindlers and Devils: Literature and Business Ethics. X Duplicated Abbott, Philip. 2010 What can we learn from Shakespeare about
“bad” leaders? EBSCOhost
Bezio, Kristin M. S 2013 Personating leadership: Shakespeare's Henry V and performative negotiation.
Google Scholar Herbel, Jerry E. 2015
Shakespeare’s Machiavellian Moment: Discovering Ethics and Forming a Leadership
Narrative in Henry V. EBSCOhost
Roberts, Sarah 2017 Alone', 'constant' and '(in)visible': Staging
leadership in Coriolanus. EBSCOhost
Subject Terms: "Shakespeare" and "management"
Subject Terms: "Shakespeare" and "business"
35
Table C2. Search results (books)
Book found Authors Exclude Reason
Power Plays: Shakespeare's Lessons in
Leadership and Management John O. Whitney and Tina Packer
Shakespeare in Charge: The Bard's Guide to
Leading and Succeeding on the Business Stage Norman Augustine and Kenneth Adelman Shakespeare on Management: Leadership
Lessons for Today's Managers Paul Corrigan
Shakespeare and Management Charles Margerison and Barry
Smith. X Not found
Shakespeare on Management: Wise Business
Council from the Bard Jay M. Shafritz
The Bard & Co.: Shakespeare's Role in Modern
Business Jim Davies, John Simmons and Rob Williams
Shakespeare on Leadership: Timeless Wisdom
for Daily Challenges Frederick Talbott
Shakespeare The Coach Ric Charlesworth
Subject Terms: "Shakespeare" and "management"
Subject Terms: "Shakespeare" and "business"
Subject Terms: "Shakespeare" and "leadership"
Appendix D – Summary of Findings and example of conclusions
Table D1. Summary of books Superficial Deep Shakespeare on Management (Shafritz, 1992) (academic)
“His contributions to the theory of management and administration have been all but ignored.” (p.xi).
Shakespeare can be considered as “the father of organization theory” (p.29).
Through some of his plays (e.g., Troilus and Cressida, The Merchant of Venice) we can observe the way people behave in an organization. Some of the lessons drawn can be summarized as follows:
Ambition - Macbeth, Henry IV, Julius Caesar
Business Ethics - Othello, The Winter's Tale, Timon of Athens Diversification - The Merchant of Venice
Experience over age - The Taming of the Shrew, Antony and Cleopatra, As You Like It
Leadership - Henry V
Planning - Richard III, Julius Caesar
Rewards and compensation - Hamlet, Love's Labor's Lost, Romeo and Juliet
Parallels: He offers a variety of analogies between corporate situations and what he found in the plays. As an example “Being fired in an organizational context parallels being killed in a battle” (p.83).
Shakespeare on Leadership: Timeless
Wisdom for Daily Challenges (Talbott, 1994) (Motivational speaker) (in addition, a research
team of 3 people)
He offers "essential lessons of the human spirit." (p.10)
The book offers so-called applied leadership commentaries to some of Shakespeare's plays. Some of them refer to risk and constant learning, which can be found in Macbeth and The Merchant of Venice; timing in Romeo and Juliet; leadership in Richard II and Henry IV; teamwork in The Winter's Tale and Richard II; the importance of experience in Othello; and loyalty in King Lear.
X X Use of quotes and excerpts providing context
Book Reason to use Shakespeare Argued Contribution Prescriptivene
ss Parallels
2
Superficial Deep
Shakespeare in Charge (Augustine & Adelman,
1999) (Both are practitioners and Adelman is also an
academic) (in addition, one researcher and two
revisers)
He provides insights into human nature and his plays can be studied for useful corporate analogies.
Henry V provides leadership lessons, he is a competent leader and a motivational speaker (St. Crispin's Day speech). With this play, it can be observed that motivated people are the best asset of an organization. From The Taming of the Shrew we can learn about change and how to cope with it.
Julius Caesar illustrates the elements of performing a task, building and managing a team, communicate properly and implement a plan. The speech of Antony at Caesar's funeral is an example of effective communication.
The Merchant of Venice displays understanding of risk management and the importance of diversification.
Hamlet instructs us in crisis management, he sets the example of how not to handle a crisis.
Parallels: Virgin Atlantic airlines (to create competitive advantage), Burton Snowboards (to dare to compete with bigger competitors), GE (how to adapt to change) and Pan Am (it could not adapt to change), 3M (Post-its as a result on transforming tragedies into opportunities), AT&T (risk taking), etc.
Shakespeare on Management - Leadership Lessons for
Today's Managers (Corrigan, 1999) (practitioner and
academic)
Management texts usually write about management as if it is only a rational experience but Shakespeare's shows us that his leaders are people just like us. Almost all of his plays provide us with insights about leadership.
Henry V illustrates leadership lessons. Richard II is an example of losing touch with reality. He thought he had the right to govern due to his title but he finds out that the does not have authority. King Lear also proves that having the title is not enough. He instructs us about power and how not to use it (e.g. in a capricious way). The play also demonstrates the importance of welcoming change and the importance of the manager to bring it on. Antony and Cleopatra provides complex lessons about leadership and illustrates that authority rather than being implicit in the title is a construction of power structures.
Richard III demonstrates that trust is essential for management. It depicts that the combination of ambition with individualism creates isolation which is a lesson on what can happen if a leader fails to build relationships, which is similar to Coriolanus, who depicts
authoritarianism and the dangers of the leader when he takes distance from humanity.Macbeth demonstrates that a leader can fail if he is ambitious and lacks integrity.
Parallels: McDonald’s and General Electric for effective leadership and IBM and Marks & Spencer to illustrate the failure to cope with change. Type of analysis Use of quotes and excerpts providing context
Book Reason to use Shakespeare Argued Contribution Prescriptivene
3 Superficial Deep Power Plays - Shakespeare's Lessons in Leadership and Management (Whitney & Packer,
2002) (Whitney is an academic
and both are practitioners)
We “believe he can be especially helpful to modern business leaders at every level of the game” (p.144)
Coriolanus illustrates the shifting of power. King Lear depicts the dangers of flattery and the risk of ignoring advice of loyal employees. Hamlet instructs us on strategy and the actions you can take to mitigate mistakes and bad consequences in a firm. Macbeth proves that best leaders seek power in order to accomplish something and not for the sake of it. Othello exemplifies how to protect from potential Iagos by staying involved with your work and creating a trusting environment in the organization. Henry V instructs us on how to deal with subordinates and how to motivate them (speech before the battle of Agincourt). Julius Caesar illustrates the art of persuasion in Antony’s speech. Finally, we can learn from both Troilus and Cressida and Othello that credibility is important for persuasion.
Parallels: Working experience mostly. AT&T's CEO and Amazon's CEO are equaled to Hamlet regarding hesitation and the lack of it, respectively. Shakespeare The Coach (Charlesworth, 2004) (sports coach) Shakespeare is an observer of human nature. He makes his characters seem real and their personalities can be studied to understand their strengths and weaknesses.
Julius Caesar can instruct us on persuasion, All's Well that Ends Well on accountability, like Coriolanus, who can guide us to make decisions and act different than Hamlet, who demonstrates that inaction can be fatal. Romeo and Juliet can teach us about learning and change, Othello about proactivity and planning, Henry V about preparation, especially through the "band of brothers" speech. Reward and recognition can be found in Troilus and Cressida, Timon of Athens and The Winter's Tale. Finally, the importance of age and experience can be seen in King Lear, Henry V, Antony and Cleopatra, Romeo and Juliet, Love's Labour's Lost and The Two Gentleman of Verona; they demonstrate that an organization shall have a balance between youth and experience since both contribute to something.
Parallels: his coach experience.
The Bard & Co.: Shakespeare's Role in
Modern Business (Davies et al., 2007) (26 writers working in the
business world)
Due to the power of his words. “Language is everything” (p.10)
The Winter's Tale represents that silence, for instance, could be helpful during an interviewing process. It also demonstrates the danger of miscommunication which can lead to damage of reputation. Hamlet depicts the “relationship between thoughts, words and action” (p.68) which is relevant since businesses need to start communicating “to inform the way they think and behave as an organization.” (p.68).
Timon of Athens, “is almost exclusively about the pursuit and management of finances” (p.94).
Twelfth Night portrays that appearances might be misleading.
Use of quotes and excerpts providing context
Book Reason to use Shakespeare Argued Contribution Prescriptivene
ss Parallels
4
Table D2. Summary of articles
Article Reason to use Shakespeare Argued Contribution Prescriptiveness Parallels excerpts providing Use of quotes and
context
Analysis
Superficial Deep
The creation of a leader in Shakespeare's
“Henry V”
(Discorfano, 2003)
Henry V reveals that the creation of a leader is a dual and active process.
There are people and there are events, and then there is the way they are both construed. Henry V is an ideal construed leader who is charismatic, eloquent and inspiring. His transformation from Prince Hal into Henry V displays that effective leadership involves being aware of one’s surroundings and to respond skillfully to context.
X X
The Othello Conundrum: The Inner
Contagion of Leadership
(Stein, 2005)
The classics of literature offer insights into the complex topics of leadership an emotions.
This paper adds the perspective of the internal workings of Othello's mind as a leader. Therefore, we can notice the
importance of understading emotions, both of oneself (as a leader) and of others in the organization. Moreover, globalization is making leaders to face the issues of being an “outsider”, like Othello.
Parallel: Gucci family dynasty.
X
Shakespeare's King Lear: Looking for an
Estate Planner
(Duska & Ragatz, 2008)
King Lear could be useful as a case study on ethics of estate planning (EP).
A lesson drawn is not to represent more than one member of the family in EP since ethical problems might arise. Also, it illustrates how to handle a client with diminished capaciy (illustrated by Othello himself). Lastly, it reminds us to construct estate plans that rely on realistic incentives rather than pure emotions.
What can we learn from Shakespeare about
“bad” leaders?
(Abbott, 2010)
Humanities can contribute to leadership theory, and Shakeseare offers an example of a "bad"leader with Richard II.
Richard III is a "bad" king because he does not acknowledge limitations on his authority. Shakespeare illustrates the value of multiple interpretations of leaders and how “good” and “bad” kings are social constructions.
Analogies: president Nixon and investment analyst Mary Meeker.
